Overseas Chinese Entrepreneurship and Kinship Transformation: an Example from Papua New Guinea

海外華人的商業發展和親屬行為變化－－巴布亞新幾內亞之一例

近年來有許多經濟人類學家研究生意人如何發展商業，研究的動機固然是想瞭解人類經濟行為，但最終目的是藉此提出經濟行為影響社會文化變遷的理論。本文例舉五十年來華人在巴布亞新幾內亞的商業發展階段，說明海外華人家庭企業之興起，親屬關係跟商業關係之密切，以及商業如何影響華人行為，繼而造成華人社會文化之變化。本文之分析以親屬行為為主，主要論點有三：（一）華人初期移民以勞工為主，但是今天已經發展為商業社會，從許多實例看來，海外華人做生意之成功，多半是靠家庭和親屬關係之運用。這並不是說海外華人墨守中國傳統父系繼嗣群的親屬原則來發展生意，其實是強調擴大建立各種親屬、姻親關係以求經營上的合作，資金周轉，以及營業和地盤之擴張。筆者舉出Fortes和Scheffler理論，認為研究任何社會之親屬制度，都不能忽略'繼嗣制度”和'親屬制度”兩種之區分。研究中國親屬制度的人過去多不談非直系繼嗣原則的親屬，這種親屬正是海外華人所強調的。海外華人在親屬運用上的創新在於重視非直系的”親屬原則”，因此個人之間之權利義務建立在雙方互惠原則的默契上，個人不受既定親屬地位之拘束。（二）海外華人組織企業時，直到今天還排斥沒有親屬關係的外人。他們相信，唯有親屬們的合作，個人才有謀求最大利潤的機會。因此，這種社會強調親屬關係，是經濟學上個人追求最大值策略的表現。（三）由於強調非直系的'親屬原則”而不強調繼嗣群的團體原則，人與人的來往非常重視利害關係，而明確表現在行為上的是父子、兄弟往來都分毫必算。這種新的文化行為是促進華人商業成功的重大因素之一。以親屬為基礎發展企業是許多海外華人社會的共通現象，但本文以巴布亞新幾內亞田野實例說明該地華人如何創新運用親屬關係，而連帶的文化行為之變化是必然的現象。

Although entrepreneurship has become a prominent subject in economic anthropology, many anthropologists have turned their attention to it not merely to study the economic sphere of a socicty but because of their intention of advancing theories of social and cultural change, Barth's research (1963) is best known for his emphasis on the role of entrepreneurs as a medium of socio-cnltural change. Barth regards social change as a consequence of the entrepreneur's manipulation of certain cultural rules in order to achieve his personal goals of either material or nonmaterial gain. The merit of Barth's approach is seen in its wide applicability in explaining social or cultural change in societies undergoing such transitions. A recent attempt to apply Barth's model in examining entrepreneurship and cultural change in rural Taiwan is found in Chen's article (1972) in a previous volume of this journal. Chen argues that the term entrepreneur (usually translated into Chinese as 企業家) need not be confined to a person engaged in business; it is more usefully identified in the context of cultural contact as a cultural 'broker' (媒介人). As 'brokers' of change, Taiwanese entrepreneurs in the villages have been active in pursuing profits, both economic and political, and in so doing, have been able to promote technological as well as economic developments. Chen's paper, however, does not tell how the 'brokers' have through their endeavors affected the social or cultural rules of the local community. Whether or not the Chinese entrepreneurs influenced other people in their kinship behavior, or whether or not they initiated new patterns of social organization remains to be explained.